Wildcat during the Battle of Britain (1 Viewer)

[GrauGeist]

My God, looking at these test results shows clearly how the Japanese Navy was able to destroy the US Navy.
If only the Americans had Spitfires, they may have won the Pacific War...

 

[jmcalli2]

We've been through this. The F4F-4 was an overweight pig. The wing folding mechanism itself was several hundred pounds. The test I sent the pics of was the original 2 F4F-3's. Just changing from 4 50's to 8 303's saves 350-400 pounds. Armor? The Spitfire had a 73 pound sheet behind the pilot. The Hurricane with supposed self sealing tanks was notorious for drenching the pilot in fuel and then lighting him on fire. The F4F-3 with a 2 stage engine if employed at the BoB would have done fine. The test I sent the pic of showed an actual test of an actual F4F-3 with 4 50's that weighed 7,300 pounds at takeoff and did 331 mph at 21,000 feet on 981 hp. Actual test. The lighter F4F with 2 30's and 2 50's weighed 6,260 pounds and did 331 mph at 22,000 feet on 944 hp. Either of those are 15 mph faster than a Hurricane at that altitude. The F4F can bunt and follow a 109 down in a dive without rolling which neither the Spitfire or Hurricane can do.

The F4F-4 would probably have done poorly in the BOB because it was an overweight pig. It would have been good for waiting at altitude, making a single diving pass at the bombers and just keep right on diving as it left the area. At least that's how I would have flown it.

The F4F-4 was an "overweight pig" because it had to land and take off from aircraft carriers. The F4F-3 was not fully equipped for that, and thus was not an operational aircraft.
Spitfires & Hurricanes had to be 'beefed up' for carrier use and their performance suffered.
Carrier aircraft are heavier than land based aircraft.
Unless you make the carrier aircraft out of paper, like the A6M.

Oh, and did I miss 8 x .30cal proving so effective during the Battle of Britain that every country adopted that as standard aircraft armament for the rest of the war? The difference between 4 x .50 cal and 8 x .30 cal is about 57lbs. The difference in weight of fire is 96kg/Min for the 8 x .30cal vs 146Kg/Min for the 4 x .50cal. For 57lbs you get 50% more lead on target and at a greater range. 3 x .50cal gives you more firepower for about the same weight as 8 x .30cals. If you want to really save weight, why not have the pilot open the canopy and fire his .45 Browning at the enemy?
Data source: The WWII Fighter Gun Debate: Gun Tables
And when you add four more holes in the leading edge of that wing, your 15 mph speed advantage is gone.

 

[pinsog]

The F4F-4 was an "overweight pig" because it had to land and take off from aircraft carriers. The F4F-3 was not fully equipped for that, and thus was not an operational aircraft.
Spitfires & Hurricanes had to be 'beefed up' for carrier use and their performance suffered.
Carrier aircraft are heavier than land based aircraft.
Unless you make the carrier aircraft out of paper, like the A6M.

Oh, and did I miss 8 x .30cal proving so effective during the Battle of Britain that every country adopted that as standard aircraft armament for the rest of the war? The difference between 4 x .50 cal and 8 x .30 cal is about 57lbs. The difference in weight of fire is 96kg/Min for the 8 x .30cal vs 146Kg/Min for the 4 x .50cal. For 57lbs you get 50% more lead on target and at a greater range. 3 x .50cal gives you more firepower for about the same weight as 8 x .30cals. If you want to really save weight, why not have the pilot open the canopy and fire his .45 Browning at the enemy?
Data source: The WWII Fighter Gun Debate: Gun Tables
And when you add four more holes in the leading edge of that wing, your 15 mph speed advantage is gone.

50 brownings weigh about 75 pounds each. 4 of them weigh around 300 pounds. 303 browning weigh about 23 pounds apiece, 8 of them weigh around 200 pounds. There is 100 pounds right there. 50 ammo weighs around 50 pounds per 200 rounds. 450 rpg is 1,800 total meaning 450 pounds total weight for ammo. 3006 (close enough to 303) weighs 33 pounds for 500 rounds. 33 pounds for 8 guns is 264 pounds. So you have around 300 pounds difference between 50 and 303.
The F4F-3 was fully cleared for carrier service, it flew on US carriers up until it was replaced for the Midway battle.
If you read back through my posts on here you will see that I have always preferred the 50 to the 30. But if you compare performance of a Wildcat to a Hurricane and the Hurricane carries 300 pounds less weight in guns and ammo it tends to skew the results.

 

[pinsog]

My God, looking at these test results shows clearly how the Japanese Navy was able to destroy the US Navy.
If only the Americans had Spitfires, they may have won the Pacific War...

The pilots that went from F4F-3 to the F4F-4 thought the -4 was an overweight pig. An 1800 feet per minute climb rate is a pathetic joke for a fighter. I've been studying the pacific battles for 40 years and I am well aware of what the Wildcat accomplished, but it doesn't change its paper performance, it was too heavy for the horsepower it had.

 

[GrauGeist]

So if 200+ pounds made the -4 an overweight pig, what shall we call the FM-2, which almost a quarter ton heavier?

 

[slaterat]

50 brownings weigh about 75 pounds each. 4 of them weigh around 300 pounds. 303 browning weigh about 23 pounds apiece, 8 of them weigh around 200 pounds. There is 100 pounds right there. 50 ammo weighs around 50 pounds per 200 rounds. 450 rpg is 1,800 total meaning 450 pounds total weight for ammo. 3006 (close enough to 303) weighs 33 pounds for 500 rounds. 33 pounds for 8 guns is 264 pounds. So you have around 300 pounds difference between 50 and 303.
The F4F-3 was fully cleared for carrier service, it flew on US carriers up until it was replaced for the Midway battle.
If you read back through my posts on here you will see that I have always preferred the 50 to the 30. But if you compare performance of a Wildcat to a Hurricane and the Hurricane carries 300 pounds less weight in guns and ammo it tends to skew the results.

I have the correct values for the above. http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f4f/f4f-3-detail-specification.pdf, gives 524lbs for the F4F armament including gun camera and pyrotechnics. The same figure for and 8 gun Hurricane is 432lbs, from, The Hurricane II manual, a total difference of 92.5 lbs. So switching out the F4F-3 too 8 x.303 , by the time you modify the wing isn't going to save you much weight, if it could be done without too much re design.

The correct maximum air speed for a rotol equipped Hurricane I is at least 324 mph. other AA&E tests tests were slightly faster.

 

[pinsog]

I have the correct values for the above. http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f4f/f4f-3-detail-specification.pdf, gives 524lbs for the F4F armament including gun camera and pyrotechnics. The same figure for and 8 gun Hurricane is 432lbs, from, The Hurricane II manual, a total difference of 92.5 lbs. So switching out the F4F-3 too 8 x.303 , by the time you modify the wing isn't going to save you much weight, if it could be done without too much re design.

The correct maximum air speed for a rotol equipped Hurricane I is at least 324 mph. other AA&E tests tests were slightly faster.

That's interesting. Surely that doesn't include ammo on the Wildcat. 450 rpg is 1800 total rounds. 50 BMG weighs 50 pounds per 200 rounds (it would vary by bullet type, I got that figure from the P36 on wwiiaircraftperformance sight)

 

[pinsog]

So if 200+ pounds made the -4 an overweight pig, what shall we call the FM-2, which almost a quarter ton heavier?

Look at my post 537. I'm showing the FM2 to be 557 pounds lighter than an F4F-4 and the FM2 has 275 more hp at sea level
Also, I'm assuming you've read The First Team? At Coral Sea the US pilots reported the F4F-3 to be the equal of the Zero in speed and climb but not nearly as maneuverable. When they got the F4F-4 they were extremely concerned/disappointed. It lost a lot of performance. This is from the pilots themselves. Give me a little while and I'll post the pics out of the First Team to back up my statements and you can read it yourself.

 

[GrauGeist]

Look at my post 537. I'm showing the FM2 to be 557 pounds lighter than an F4F-4 and the FM2 has 275 more hp at sea level
Also, I'm assuming you've read The First Team? At Coral Sea the US pilots reported the F4F-3 to be the equal of the Zero in speed and climb but not nearly as maneuverable. When they got the F4F-4 they were extremely concerned/disappointed. It lost a lot of performance. This is from the pilots themselves. Give me a little while and I'll post the pics out of the First Team to back up my statements and you can read it yourself.

I'm assuming you missed my post at #539 that showed the empty weights of the F4F-3, F4F-3A, F4F-4 and FM-2.

These are values according to the USN and the FM-2 is clearly heavier.

 

[RCAFson]

Look at my post 537. I'm showing the FM2 to be 557 pounds lighter than an F4F-4 and the FM2 has 275 more hp at sea level
Also, I'm assuming you've read The First Team? At Coral Sea the US pilots reported the F4F-3 to be the equal of the Zero in speed and climb but not nearly as maneuverable. When they got the F4F-4 they were extremely concerned/disappointed. It lost a lot of performance. This is from the pilots themselves. Give me a little while and I'll post the pics out of the First Team to back up my statements and you can read it yourself.

We've all seen performance reports of multiple F4F-4 aircraft and even at a very similar weight they cannot match the F4F-3 report of Aug 1940. In view of that and the engine issues reported in Aug 1940, we have to take the Aug 1940 report as being questionable.

That was their first experience with the Zero. At Midway the the 22 MAG, flying F2A-3 and F4F-3s and stated:

- (a) As evidenced by statements of pilots who flew them in
actual combat, the performance of the F2A-3 and F4F-3 types of air-
Planes is markedly inferior to that of the Japanese 00 1 Sento Kl -
Fighter in speed, maneuverability, and rate of climb. The fact that.
Marine Fighting squadron 221 gave such an excellent account of it-
self should not be allowed to becloud this fact, but is directly _.
attributable largely to an exceptionally fine organization of fight-
ing pilot personnel and apparent great vulnerability of enemy
bombers. In view of the foregoing it is recommended that F2A-3 and
F4F-3 type airplanes be not assigned as equipment for use in combat,
but be retained for use at training centers only. (MAG 22 CO report)

 

[RCAFson]

The pilots that went from F4F-3 to the F4F-4 thought the -4 was an overweight pig. An 1800 feet per minute climb rate is a pathetic joke for a fighter. I've been studying the pacific battles for 40 years and I am well aware of what the Wildcat accomplished, but it doesn't change its paper performance, it was too heavy for the horsepower it had.

Weight with full ammo, fuel, armour and SS tanks, was 7556lb for the F4F-3 and 7975lb for the F4F-4. A 420lb difference, or less than 6%. Yes, the extra weight will degrade performance but at the same weight, as per test data, the performance should be essentially identical.

 

[slaterat]

That's interesting. Surely that doesn't include ammo on the Wildcat. 450 rpg is 1800 total rounds. 50 BMG weighs 50 pounds per 200 rounds (it would vary by bullet type, I got that figure from the P36 on wwiiaircraftperformance sight)

That is very interesting, is it another case of US testing of aircraft without ammo load? I have seen that before. I also noticed that the 330 mph figure and the 3,300 ft/min climb, were with a fuel load of 110 gallons, which is only 14 more than a Hurricane.

 

[RCAFson]

That is very interesting, is it another case of US testing of aircraft without ammo load? I have seen that before. I also noticed that the 330 mph figure and the 3,300 ft/min climb, were with a fuel load of 110 gallons, which is only 14 more than a Hurricane.

110USG = 92IG. Full fuel on a Hurricane was 97IG or 116USG.

 

[pinsog]

From The First Team page 300

From the first team page 318. F4F-3 vs F4F-4 "it had the same engine and weighed about 800 pounds more"

 

[pinsog]

Weight with full ammo, fuel, armour and SS tanks, was 7556lb for the F4F-3 and 7975lb for the F4F-4. A 420lb difference, or less than 6%. Yes, the extra weight will degrade performance but at the same weight, as per test data, the performance should be essentially identical.

Take 2 identical BoB Hurricanes, Spitfires or ME109's and add 420 pounds of lead directly below the pilot and then let them dogfight each other. It may not be a huge difference in a Corsair or P47 or P38 but when you have less than 1,100 hp I can assure you that 420 pounds is a lot of weight. Page 318 of The First Team says "it had the same engine and weighed 800 pounds more". That quote is in the lower pic in the post above

 

[pinsog]

We've all seen performance reports of multiple F4F-4 aircraft and even at a very similar weight they cannot match the F4F-3 report of Aug 1940. In view of that and the engine issues reported in Aug 1940, we have to take the Aug 1940 report as being questionable.

That was their first experience with the Zero. At Midway the the 22 MAG, flying F2A-3 and F4F-3s and stated:

- (a) As evidenced by statements of pilots who flew them in
actual combat, the performance of the F2A-3 and F4F-3 types of air-
Planes is markedly inferior to that of the Japanese 00 1 Sento Kl -
Fighter in speed, maneuverability, and rate of climb. The fact that.
Marine Fighting squadron 221 gave such an excellent account of it-
self should not be allowed to becloud this fact, but is directly _.
attributable largely to an exceptionally fine organization of fight-
ing pilot personnel and apparent great vulnerability of enemy
bombers. In view of the foregoing it is recommended that F2A-3 and
F4F-3 type airplanes be not assigned as equipment for use in combat,
but be retained for use at training centers only. (MAG 22 CO report)

I wonder if the difference in perceived performance between Coral Sea and Midway was difference in training between high time Navy pilots and lower time Marine pilots? Were the Marine Wildcats worn out? Marine Wildcats not as well maintained as planes on a carrier. I don't know, I'm asking, because we have 2 completely different reports on the same fighters vs each other.

 

[RCAFson]

From The First Team page 300From the first team page 318. F4F-3 vs F4F-4 "it had the same engine and weighed about 800 pounds more"

The weights I quoted are from the USN SAC data = 7556lb and 7975lb. I don't doubt that an F4F-3 without armour, SS tanks, and maybe a partial fuel and ammo load could be pared down considerably but this is hardly a fair comparison.

Even the Aug 1941 spec for the F4F-3 states 7432lb (but these weights increased) for the overload fighter while the March 1942 production inspection of F4F-4 #4058 states 7921lb for the overload fighter and by Oct 1942 these weights had increased to 7975lb.

The Aug 1941 spec for the F4F-3 at 7432lb states 336mph (which, in fact seems like a typo and should probably read 326) while the March 1942 production inspection of the F4F-4 #4508 at 7370lb states 319mph based on flight testing.

 

[pinsog]

These are the empty weights of the Wildcat types:
F4F-3 - 5,238 lbs.
F4F-3A - 5,216 lbs.
F4F-4 - 5,448 lbs.
FM-2 - 5,895 lbs.

The F4F-4 had six .50 MGs where all other types had four .50

I'm showing 5,324 pounds for an empty FM2. Here is where my info came from. And they added a lot of power, especially down low. Up to 1,475 hp at sea level.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f4f/fm-2-15953.pdf

 

[pinsog]

5,324 pounds for an empty FM2

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f4f/fm-2-15953.pdf

 

[jmcalli2]

50 brownings weigh about 75 pounds each. 4 of them weigh around 300 pounds. 303 browning weigh about 23 pounds apiece, 8 of them weigh around 200 pounds. There is 100 pounds right there. 50 ammo weighs around 50 pounds per 200 rounds. 450 rpg is 1,800 total meaning 450 pounds total weight for ammo. 3006 (close enough to 303) weighs 33 pounds for 500 rounds. 33 pounds for 8 guns is 264 pounds. So you have around 300 pounds difference between 50 and 303.
The F4F-3 was fully cleared for carrier service, it flew on US carriers up until it was replaced for the Midway battle.
If you read back through my posts on here you will see that I have always preferred the 50 to the 30. But if you compare performance of a Wildcat to a Hurricane and the Hurricane carries 300 pounds less weight in guns and ammo it tends to skew the results.

Look at the data reference I provided.

I'll do the math for you:

4 x .50cal @ 29Kg each = 116Kg x 2.2Lb/Kg =255Lbs.
8 x .30cal @ 10.4Kg each = 83.2Kg x 2.2Lb/Kg = 183Lbs.
255 - 183 = 72Lbs difference. **My bad for bad math saying it was 57 lbs diff.**
200 rounds of .50cal ammo = 50Lbs ( http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-36/P-36_Operation_and_Flight_Instruction.pdf ).
500 rounds of .30cal ammo = 33Lbs. ( Same source as above).
4 x 50Lbs = 200Lbs for 4 .50cal @ 200 rounds/gun, 240Lbs @ 240 rounds/gun.
8 x 33Lbs = 264Lbs for the .30cal @ 500 rounds/gun. Your weight advantage is pretty much gone.

As for firepower:
4 x .50cal x 850 rounds/min x 43g/round = 146,200g = 146Kg/min.
8 x .30cal x 1200 rounds/min x 10g/round = 96,000g = 96Kg/min.
96/146 = 65.7%

Eight .30cals had just under 2/3 the firepower of four .50cals.

In addition, the effective range of the .30cal is 1500 yards; the effective range of the .50cal is 2000 yards.

Use three .50cals: weight is about 191Lbs, firepower is 109Kg/min. You increase firepower by 11% for 8lbs.

Using 8 x .30cals would be in no way an improvement to a WWII fighter.